More statements from JIP

John M Flores

Super Moderator
Joined
Jan 7, 2011
Messages
3,103
Location
NJ
You still must be able to capture at least 6k RAW video in order to really use it as a an indefinitely long burst mode of 20MP stills.

Good news is that this has been possible since May using consumer ILC cameras like Panasonic S1H

"Panasonic has announced the LUMIX S1H firmware update program version 2.1 that supports RAW video data output. Working together with Atomos, a global company that creates video equipment for professional film creators, the new firmware enables the output of maximum 5.9K/29.97p and 59.94p 4K* RAW video data over HDMI to save it as Apple ProRes RAW on the Atomos Ninja V 4K HDR monitor-recorder."
https://www.panasonic.com/global/consumer/lumix/s/s1h/firmware_atomos.html

So there you go. All you need is S1H, Atomos Ninja V and a bag full of SSD disks to shoot an entire 90+ minutes soccer game in continuous 20MP 30fps burst.
You might need some time to go through all 162 000 images and select the good ones though.

(Technically speaking it's 19,5MP at 29.97fps but who cares)
I've landed cover photos and opening spreads with 4k video.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


I liken it to shooting with a 15 year old DSLR - you really need to nail your composition and exposure in camera because you don't have much latitude in post. And like all things, it's the content that counts the most.
 

LineDance

New to Mu-43
Joined
Oct 29, 2020
Messages
8
The notion of good enough - and m43 is more than good enough for most users - is at odds with commercial needs of Photography Review Sites, YouTube Channels and their Advertisers.

To obtain early loan equipment for review and to court or maintain advertisers, creators (industry pundits) need to say nicer things about the newer things. The business model requires majority to promote FF and new technologies. Sadly this impacts the hobby element and grass roots, ultimately setting too many up to fail with a heavy and overpriced kit bag as they needlessly chase the wrong targets.

Since receiving my first m43 camera 3/4 years ago, the price of lenses has sky rocketed, making it much harder to add new lenses. Hopefully JIP can do something about this. Many lenses like the 17mm 1.8 have been in production for best part of a decade, the price rises don’t make sense to me.
 
Last edited:

SilverShutter

Mu-43 Rookie
Joined
Oct 22, 2020
Messages
22
Location
Ireland
The notion of good enough - and m43 is more than good enough for most users - is at odds with Photography Review Sites, YouTube Channels and Advertisers.

To obtain early loan equipment for review and to court or maintain advertisers, creators need to say nicer things about the newer things. The business model requires majority to promote FF and new technologies. Sadly this impacts the hobby element and grass roots, ultimately setting them up to fail with an overpriced (and heavy) kit bag as they chase the wrong targets.
I agree, good enough rarely makes for an interesting topic to discuss. We need to differentiate between entertainment and real-life use. Ultimately, when even 35mm film can be good enough today, there's no reason why m4/3 shouldn't be.
 

pdk42

One of the "Eh?" team
Joined
Jan 11, 2013
Messages
7,308
Location
Leamington Spa, UK
The notion of good enough - and m43 is more than good enough for most users - is at odds with commercial needs of Photography Review Sites, YouTube Channels and their Advertisers.

To obtain early loan equipment for review and to court or maintain advertisers, creators (industry pundits) need to say nicer things about the newer things. The business model requires majority to promote FF and new technologies. Sadly this impacts the hobby element and grass roots, ultimately setting too many up to fail with a heavy and overpriced kit bag as they needlessly chase the wrong targets.

Since receiving my first m43 camera 3/4 years ago, the price of lenses has sky rocketed, making it much harder to add new lenses. Hopefully JIP can do something about this. Many lenses like the 17mm 1.8 have been in production for best part of a decade, the price rises don’t make sense to me.
This "good enough" issue is of particular relevance to me since I recently had a 3 month detour into high Mp FF (Nikon Z7) but eventually decided that I just preferred working with the Olympus system so came "home" again. The main realisation I made was that despite the obviously superior IQ of the Nikon, it really didn't count for much in terms of how I was using the output (mostly on-line, some A3/A2 prints). Maybe others will come to a different conclusion (and I can see that high ISO performance could be a big deal for people who need it), but I don't think I'm that unusual in my needs.

However, I agree entirely with your point about how the photo review community handles m43, and their almost complete lack of relating whether the IQ is "good enough". This Petapixel review of the E-M1iii is a great example - and actually, I think it's a fair review, so better than many others. They clearly used the camera for more than 5 mins (not something all reviewers do!) and said a lot of positive things about it. But they criticised the camera in three key areas - the sensor, the rear LCD, and the EVF. I actually agree with them on the rear LCD and the EVF since these are things that Olympus could have, and should have, upgraded. They are both components that are readily available from the usual vendors and could relatively easily been introduced into the camera. Neither are related in the slightest to the sensor format and both would have improved the usability and "pleasure" of using the camera.

When it comes to the sensor though, I have mixed feelings. PetePixel said some strong things:

Petepixel article said:
This is the same 20.4-megapixel sensor we’ve been seeing from Micro Four Thirds for years. It’s actually the same sensor found in the previous iteration, the OM-D E-M1 Mark II. It has below average dynamic range, below average ISO performance, and as a result, it has below average detail preservation. While it is possible to, on occasion, get a truly spectacularly sharp image, those times are outnumbered by bare misses.
Petapixel article said:
...in 2020 when your competition of putting image quality first and above all else, it really can hurt when arguably the most important thing about owning a camera, which is getting good images, isn’t your strongest asset.
Petapixel article said:
I have a few good photos of the 5000 I shot over two days, but I have many more less-than-perfect photos that I just can’t bring myself to publish. In the modern camera world and amongst the stiff competition, I want great. I even expect it. And great is much harder to hit with this sensor.
I think that last point is seriously over-stepping the reality - you only need to look at the work of many top-flight pros using m43 gear to realise that.

But I guess it's just a reflection of what happens when you get an arms-race between competitors. The US and the USSR got to the point of being able to annihilate the world a hundred times over before the brakes went on with nuclear weapons.

But what if the E-M1iii had been launched with a new sensor? A 36Mp BSI device for example (which is clearly within the bounds of modern sensor tech) would have done wonders for the format and toned down this type of negative review. But, I wonder to what extent it would have mattered in terms of making better photographs? Maybe that doesn't actually matter though - it's just about making sure you're keeping up with the Joneses.
 

MichailK

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Nov 6, 2017
Messages
949
Location
Thessaly, Greece
(
The US and the USSR got to the point of being able to annihilate the world a hundred times over before the brakes went on with nuclear weapons.
by the way, this man is to blame for us still being here and having this threaded chat
)
yeap, a 36mpx sensor would not be doing much on real life IQ but could have been the m43 singing hero for the M1iv, plus an updated evf if it does not take too long to arrive
 

RichardC

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Mar 25, 2018
Messages
3,565
Location
The Royal Town of Sutton Coldfield, UK.
Real Name
Richard
"Petapixel article said:
I have a few good photos of the 5000 I shot over two days, but I have many more less-than-perfect photos that I just can’t bring myself to publish. In the modern camera world and amongst the stiff competition, I want great. I even expect it. And great is much harder to hit with this sensor."

If you go out and take 5000 pictures, with a majority of them being too poor to share, not only do you need to give your head a wobble and question why you took 5K in the first place, but perhaps the time has come to re-evaluate your photography skills or maybe even look for a less challenging hobby?

I appreciate it's quite possible to shoot that many in pro-capture mode, but in those circumstances you can be shooting 120 images with the objective of getting just one keeper.
 

Mike Wingate

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Feb 21, 2017
Messages
3,261
Location
Altrincham
Real Name
Mike Wingate
Imagine how many people would buy an affordable Lumix camera with a 36mpx sensor, just because it has more than some other, plus the other positives, such a small telephoto lenses.
 

pdk42

One of the "Eh?" team
Joined
Jan 11, 2013
Messages
7,308
Location
Leamington Spa, UK
Imagine how many people would buy an affordable Lumix camera with a 36mpx sensor, just because it has more than some other, plus the other positives, such a small telephoto lenses.
I agree. There is absolutely a market for m43 - the IQ is certainly more than good enough and the size/weight/stabilisation/lens range/features mix is just way better than anything else. I really hope that JIP and Panasonic realise this and keep investing in the system's future. 36x24 sensors cannot be the answer to absolutely everything. It needs another serious round of PR/marketing to change perceptions.
 
Joined
Jun 19, 2016
Messages
357
Real Name
Mike Peters
The biggest limitation to the quality you can get out of a M4/3 camera is the user. There are very few scenarios where it is not sufficient. As in the old days of film, 35mm and MF were fine 99% of the time, and sometimes you just needed to haul out that 8x10 to get the job done. I shot a lot of MF film over the years, and what I get out of my little Lumix beats the IQ from anything I got out of my Hasselblad, Rollei or Mamiya cameras and lenses.
 

nstelemark

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
May 28, 2013
Messages
3,426
Location
Halifax, Nova Scotia Canada
Real Name
Larry
This "good enough" issue is of particular relevance to me since I recently had a 3 month detour into high Mp FF (Nikon Z7) but eventually decided that I just preferred working with the Olympus system so came "home" again. The main realisation I made was that despite the obviously superior IQ of the Nikon, it really didn't count for much in terms of how I was using the output (mostly on-line, some A3/A2 prints). Maybe others will come to a different conclusion (and I can see that high ISO performance could be a big deal for people who need it), but I don't think I'm that unusual in my needs.

<snip>

But what if the E-M1iii had been launched with a new sensor? A 36Mp BSI device for example (which is clearly within the bounds of modern sensor tech) would have done wonders for the format and toned down this type of negative review. But, I wonder to what extent it would have mattered in terms of making better photographs? Maybe that doesn't actually matter though - it's just about making sure you're keeping up with the Joneses.
This pretty much sums up my feelings as well. For me HHR satisfies the High Mp requirement, but as you noted you can't tell except on a really good monitor, which is mostly pointless(*). Effectively though the reviewers and forum trolls are all basically shooting images for themselves to be viewed on 4K+ monitors with 8GB graphic cards. In this environment m43 can't win with the 20mp sensor.

*sure there are other examples, but they are not the norm.

This image looks stunning on my big 32" 4K monitor, filling the screen, here it looks OK.

PA210323.jpeg
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 
Last edited:

MichailK

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Nov 6, 2017
Messages
949
Location
Thessaly, Greece
it seems that all these FF worshiping guys are used on framing on their PC after they took a myriad shots cropping heavily the selected uncomposited original picture - this way of working needs all the resolution one can buy so an m43 system is never enough when you skip using the very basic skills always associated with photography - effin’ Sony with their “shoot now, think later” campaign a decade ago ruined the place for good!
 

ac12

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Apr 24, 2018
Messages
2,990
Location
SF Bay Area, California, USA
In thinking about the sensor as in Z6/Z7 and D750/D850, I am not so keen about going to a 36MP sensor.
Right now, I would be happier with a 20MP sensor with better low light capability, so that I can shoot at 6400 or 12800 with less high ISO noise.
 

pdk42

One of the "Eh?" team
Joined
Jan 11, 2013
Messages
7,308
Location
Leamington Spa, UK
In thinking about the sensor as in Z6/Z7 and D750/D850, I am not so keen about going to a 36MP sensor.
Right now, I would be happier with a 20MP sensor with better low light capability, so that I can shoot at 6400 or 12800 with less high ISO noise.
I agree in the sense that I'd appreciate better noise handling or DR rather than just more resolution - but the history of sensors is that as Mp has increased so has noise performance and DR. And if we're going to get a new generation of m43 sensors, then we may as well up the Mp as well - unless doing so will be at the expense of noise/DR.
 

LineDance

New to Mu-43
Joined
Oct 29, 2020
Messages
8
This "good enough" issue is of particular relevance to me since I recently had a 3 month detour into high Mp FF (Nikon Z7) but eventually decided that I just preferred working with the Olympus system so came "home" again. The main realisation I made was that despite the obviously superior IQ of the Nikon, it really didn't count for much in terms of how I was using the output (mostly on-line, some A3/A2 prints). Maybe others will come to a different conclusion (and I can see that high ISO performance could be a big deal for people who need it), but I don't think I'm that unusual in my needs.

However, I agree entirely with your point about how the photo review community handles m43, and their almost complete lack of relating whether the IQ is "good enough". This Petapixel review of the E-M1iii is a great example - and actually, I think it's a fair review, so better than many others. They clearly used the camera for more than 5 mins (not something all reviewers do!) and said a lot of positive things about it. But they criticised the camera in three key areas - the sensor, the rear LCD, and the EVF. I actually agree with them on the rear LCD and the EVF since these are things that Olympus could have, and should have, upgraded. They are both components that are readily available from the usual vendors and could relatively easily been introduced into the camera. Neither are related in the slightest to the sensor format and both would have improved the usability and "pleasure" of using the camera.

When it comes to the sensor though, I have mixed feelings. PetePixel said some strong things:







I think that last point is seriously over-stepping the reality - you only need to look at the work of many top-flight pros using m43 gear to realise that.

But I guess it's just a reflection of what happens when you get an arms-race between competitors. The US and the USSR got to the point of being able to annihilate the world a hundred times over before the brakes went on with nuclear weapons.

But what if the E-M1iii had been launched with a new sensor? A 36Mp BSI device for example (which is clearly within the bounds of modern sensor tech) would have done wonders for the format and toned down this type of negative review. But, I wonder to what extent it would have mattered in terms of making better photographs? Maybe that doesn't actually matter though - it's just about making sure you're keeping up with the Joneses.
PetaPixel comments on softness across 5000 shots it worrying.

Despite knowing how good m43 is, and comparing directly to FF Canon Pro Bodies and L Lenses from 10 years ago, I still wonder what the catch is. Media Bias is very powerful, even if unfounded and subconscious. Despite knowing better, the reporting bias still influences my thoughts, and to some degree confidence in smaller sensors.

Remember good old days, in late 90’s with Photo.Net reviewing/discussing EOS 3, and wondering (but knowing there wasn’t) what quality improvements that popular semi-pro body would give over consumer options. Remember the ‘2 shots’ over sized Polaroid portraits by Elsa Dorfman, camera in one room, photographer in another. Remember, Joey L early postings with Canon G3 giving all the background details on his work, a prolific talent at only 15 years of age, self taught using what many might consider basic equipment. Sadly much of his early stuff appears hard to find, or maybe removed. Remember Pope’s Posts on new canon’s, often shooting hot in a good way, with gentle roll off on highlights.

Best of all, Remember the early Canon Pro DSLR shots taken and judged by VOGUE Photographers. If I remember right, 4 Mega Pixel EOS 1d files being used for both A4 and A3 fashion spreads, and professionals couldn’t tell them apart from traditional methods. The ‘300dpi rule’ is much misunderstood to this day. 4mp and no aa filter had more moire issues in those days, but it was a sign.

When I first saw E-M10 sooc jpeg files with a kit lens, I was very impressed, yet was puzzled why majority of consumers kept buying dslr’s with inferior results from kit lenses, and the associated af issues.

To this day, amazed Canon got away with describing their DSLR’s as ‘an interchangeable lens system’ across 2 decades. With canon mirrorless they now say the end of ‘micro adjustments’, which was a dam clever marketing hood wink in its own right - along with distracting people by discussing the unmeasurable (by consumers) depth of focus argument, rather than acknowledging problems with position of depth of field using af (which anyone could easily see with a suitable A2 test chart, and evaluate using accepted truth that technically point of focus should be placed within depth of field).

The idea of buying one new lens or body, and then having to send your WHOLE KIT to canon for Af Adjustment was ridiculous. Each item should have been individually adjusted to a neutral standard (using a tool lens or body, and official test chart), and then operated in tolerance range (from neutral as an average). They should have come from factory like that, or CPS should have adjusted them back to that. But they knew items didn’t always meet specifications, tolerances or expectations of reasonable standard, and they would pick the easy option, if 2 items didn’t work together, to try and get them to work to an acceptable af standard - this strategy failed too often.

Canon (CPS) were also caught without having (or using) the correct test chart or neutral tool items (lens or body) to use as reference, before then making a misguided af adjustment that could (and did) make things dramatically worse, having taken one test shot on a Micky Mouse A4 test chart at close focusing distance (which made most items look great). What did CPS do when caught with their pants down and hands in the cookie jar - they lied, blaming customer not service team or management.

Back then af issues in professional wedding albums were quite common, back focus being easier to spot, front focus seemed more common. But from memory fewer issues were seen with blown highlights. Perhaps coming from film people were more aware of issues with burnt highlights. Today, many forum posters insist they need the very latest, best, most dynamic range, lowest noise, etc, as it’s essential to their work, blah blah blah - then they go and blow highlights and fill in shadows with complete abandon, notably on grooms suits and brides dresses - is it lack of skill, not bothered or a bad style. B&G’s still seem to pick’em tho. Perhaps styles have changed - but perhaps that’s even more reason why m43 is good enough.

If I’m ranting, apologies.
 
Last edited:

LineDance

New to Mu-43
Joined
Oct 29, 2020
Messages
8
This pretty much sums up my feelings as well. For me HHR satisfies the High Mp requirement, but as you noted you can't tell except on a really good monitor, which is mostly pointless(*). Effectively though the reviewers and forum trolls are all basically shooting images for themselves to be viewed on 4K+ monitors with 8GB graphic cards. In this environment m43 can't win with the 20mp sensor.

*sure there are other examples, but they are not the norm.

This image looks stunning on my big 32" 4K monitor, filling the screen, here it looks OK.

View attachment 855013
Interesting, hadn’t been aware of this viewing option. 4K telly’s look great in showrooms, hadn’t thought of using them for images.

Years ago put an SD card in a 720p HD telly and wasn’t impressed.

Am still using digital projectors to show images on large display screen - but at 60” (I think) it’s probably not so big now.
 

Robstar1963

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Jun 10, 2011
Messages
3,293
Location
Isle of Wight England UK
Real Name
Robert (Rob)
The thing that surprised me was that upon researching FF cameras (bought a Z6) entry level FF cameras including the very recently released Canon R6 @ £2500 start at just 20mp and several have ‘only‘ 24mp
Against this the 20mp of our M43 sensors doesn’t seem like we are getting short changed in terms of resolution and I would be much happier having a BSI sensor with significant low light response
 

RichardC

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Mar 25, 2018
Messages
3,565
Location
The Royal Town of Sutton Coldfield, UK.
Real Name
Richard
PetaPixel comments on softness across 5000 shots it worrying.
Maybe I've been lucky, but I've not encountered an inherent sharpness problem with any MFT body or lens I've ever owned.

I think it's important to read the whole review. He was shooting with the 40-150mm f2.8, 300mm f4, 1,4x converters. He appears to be shooting surfers and zoo animals. He says ISO3200 isn't good enough (well get a monopod and don't bloody use it then!).

In his closing statement, he again refers to the sensor.

"You can get a D500, a truly phenomenal camera, for less than the Olympus E-M1 Mark III. Sure, it’s a DSLR, but it’s got a bigger sensor and a better autofocus system."

It's a pity that he chose not to publish his sub-par photographs. It would be interesting to see what he was attempting to shoot and how he was attempting to shoot it.
 

LineDance

New to Mu-43
Joined
Oct 29, 2020
Messages
8
Maybe I've been lucky, but I've not encountered an inherent sharpness problem with any MFT body or lens I've ever owned.

I think it's important to read the whole review. He was shooting with the 40-150mm f2.8, 300mm f4, 1,4x converters. He appears to be shooting surfers and zoo animals. He says ISO3200 isn't good enough (well get a monopod and don't bloody use it then!).

In his closing statement, he again refers to the sensor.

"You can get a D500, a truly phenomenal camera, for less than the Olympus E-M1 Mark III. Sure, it’s a DSLR, but it’s got a bigger sensor and a better autofocus system."

It's a pity that he chose not to publish his sub-par photographs. It would be interesting to see what he was attempting to shoot and how he was attempting to shoot it.
Interesting and Very ReAssuring when you put comments into wider context. Thank You.

I’ve never been happy with x1.4 and x2.0 tele converters on my Canon 70-200 f2.8 IS, May have only ever taken few dozen shots with them, maybe 36 shots LOL, tend to use that lens for portraits and weddings, not wildlife. Think the extra range on Olympus 40-150mm would better suit any playing with wildlife that I might do In future.

Stop Press - just had my Promotional 25mm f1.2 Pro Approved :). Only wish my November trip to Goa wasn’t cancelled.
 

Latest posts

Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Mu-43 is a fan site and not associated with Olympus, Panasonic, or other manufacturers mentioned on this site.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Copyright © 2009-2019 Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom